Bah, sign the whole thing and be done with it. So what if it doesn't connect to anything on the north side for a decade or more? Better to get it resigned all at once rather than have to introduce another number change in the future.

I agree. Now with the way they are signing it there will be two disjointed sections of SR 385 in Shelby County. And US 51 in Millington would be a perfectly fine stopping point for 269 until they complete the rest of SIU 9.

It's likely the reticence about signing I-269 over the TN 385 segment north and west of I-40 has as much to do with perception than reality -- as there's no timetable for actually developing I-69 from Memphis to Dyersburg, TDOT doesn't want to give the public -- or any backers or even detractors of the SIU 9 segment -- any reason to expect any concrete action on that segment. They're probably of the (internal) opinion that if they were to sign I-269 over the northern stretch, there would be both pressure to actually come up with definitive plans to build out I-69 to meet the northwest end of the loop or, alternately, increased vocal opposition from local and/or environmental activists. TDOT seems to be engaged in a consistent pattern of procrastination regarding this SIU (given their financial situation that is understandable); that'll be the status quo for some time -- and they want to avoid any more short-term controversies adding to the problems posed by their fiscal situation.

Bah, sign the whole thing and be done with it. So what if it doesn't connect to anything on the north side for a decade or more? Better to get it resigned all at once rather than have to introduce another number change in the future.

I agree. Now with the way they are signing it there will be two disjointed sections of SR 385 in Shelby County. And US 51 in Millington would be a perfectly fine stopping point for 269 until they complete the rest of SIU 9.

It's likely the reticence about signing I-269 over the TN 385 segment north and west of I-40 has as much to do with perception than reality -- as there's no timetable for actually developing I-69 from Memphis to Dyersburg, TDOT doesn't want to give the public -- or any backers or even detractors of the SIU 9 segment -- any reason to expect any concrete action on that segment. They're probably of the (internal) opinion that if they were to sign I-269 over the northern stretch, there would be both pressure to actually come up with definitive plans to build out I-69 to meet the northwest end of the loop or, alternately, increased vocal opposition from local and/or environmental activists. TDOT seems to be engaged in a consistent pattern of procrastination regarding this SIU (given their financial situation that is understandable); that'll be the status quo for some time -- and they want to avoid any more short-term controversies adding to the problems posed by their fiscal situation.

This is probably true; however, one way that I think would justify extending the designation would be to finish I-69 in Shelby County from SR-300 to SR 385. I believe this could help development(s) in an economically depressed area of Memphis and improve the connection from Millington to downtown Memphis. I know this is highly unrealistic given the circumstances, but I can dream I guess.

Bah, sign the whole thing and be done with it. So what if it doesn't connect to anything on the north side for a decade or more? Better to get it resigned all at once rather than have to introduce another number change in the future.

I agree. Now with the way they are signing it there will be two disjointed sections of SR 385 in Shelby County. And US 51 in Millington would be a perfectly fine stopping point for 269 until they complete the rest of SIU 9.

It's likely the reticence about signing I-269 over the TN 385 segment north and west of I-40 has as much to do with perception than reality -- as there's no timetable for actually developing I-69 from Memphis to Dyersburg, TDOT doesn't want to give the public -- or any backers or even detractors of the SIU 9 segment -- any reason to expect any concrete action on that segment. They're probably of the (internal) opinion that if they were to sign I-269 over the northern stretch, there would be both pressure to actually come up with definitive plans to build out I-69 to meet the northwest end of the loop or, alternately, increased vocal opposition from local and/or environmental activists. TDOT seems to be engaged in a consistent pattern of procrastination regarding this SIU (given their financial situation that is understandable); that'll be the status quo for some time -- and they want to avoid any more short-term controversies adding to the problems posed by their fiscal situation.

This is probably true; however, one way that I think would justify extending the designation would be to finish I-69 in Shelby County from SR-300 to SR 385. I believe this could help development(s) in an economically depressed area of Memphis and improve the connection from Millington to downtown Memphis. I know this is highly unrealistic given the circumstances, but I can dream I guess.

That short segment of I-69 might be done as part of the larger project, but there's little or no impetus to do just the southern part of SIU 9 as a stand-alone segment just to connect to the outer TN 385 bypass. Memphis-Dyersburg will likely be done as a unit when and if funding is identified and available, like most of the other SIU's have been to date. Right now it appears that TDOT is initially focusing on Dyersburg-Fulton, since most of the preliminary work has already been done to get that segment (SIU 8) up & running. Don't expect to see much in the way of action on SIU 9 in the early 2020's unless a $$ windfall occurs.

I'm still trying to figure out why there is no sign on I-40 that will show a To I-22 Birmingham/Tupelo shield for the I-269 exit? It would seem like common sense to add this sign to I-40 East/West before exits 24/25.

I'm still trying to figure out why there is no sign on I-40 that will show a To I-22 Birmingham/Tupelo shield for the I-269 exit? It would seem like common sense to add this sign to I-40 East/West before exits 24/25.

That may come in time -- but that's one of the inconsistencies when an actual construction project is going on in one state that affects traffic patterns in an adjacent state -- the latter often doesn't get around to posting trailblazer signage until the facility is fully open -- and sometimes not at all. In this instance, the shortest way to get to I-22 from central Memphis is via SB I-55 and EB I-269 rather than from I-40, where the junction with TN 385/I-269 is well east of where I-40 turns NE toward Jackson. The immediate need for such signage may not be apparent until after I-269 is completed in MS and the outer metro traffic patterns adjust to the presence of the new facility. OTOH, I would expect "TO I-22" signage to appear at the I-240 approaches to the E-W section of TN 385 out to Collierville, as that's part of a much shorter pathway to I-22.

I'm still trying to figure out why there is no sign on I-40 that will show a To I-22 Birmingham/Tupelo shield for the I-269 exit? It would seem like common sense to add this sign to I-40 East/West before exits 24/25.

That may come in time -- but that's one of the inconsistencies when an actual construction project is going on in one state that affects traffic patterns in an adjacent state -- the latter often doesn't get around to posting trailblazer signage until the facility is fully open -- and sometimes not at all. In this instance, the shortest way to get to I-22 from central Memphis is via SB I-55 and EB I-269 rather than from I-40, where the junction with TN 385/I-269 is well east of where I-40 turns NE toward Jackson. The immediate need for such signage may not be apparent until after I-269 is completed in MS and the outer metro traffic patterns adjust to the presence of the new facility. OTOH, I would expect "TO I-22" signage to appear at the I-240 approaches to the E-W section of TN 385 out to Collierville, as that's part of a much shorter pathway to I-22.

In that case, they should do more than add signs on 385. Instead of ending I-22 at I-269 (because the interstate plan was to connect Memphis and Birmingham) they should have I-22 follow I-269 north to 385 right across the state line. hwy 385 should be resigned as I-22 and it would end at the I-240 junction. This would give a direct route from Inner Memphis to Inner Birmingham. I'm not sure if anyone has thought about it on the state and federal level, but they should've.

I'm still trying to figure out why there is no sign on I-40 that will show a To I-22 Birmingham/Tupelo shield for the I-269 exit? It would seem like common sense to add this sign to I-40 East/West before exits 24/25.

That may come in time -- but that's one of the inconsistencies when an actual construction project is going on in one state that affects traffic patterns in an adjacent state -- the latter often doesn't get around to posting trailblazer signage until the facility is fully open -- and sometimes not at all. In this instance, the shortest way to get to I-22 from central Memphis is via SB I-55 and EB I-269 rather than from I-40, where the junction with TN 385/I-269 is well east of where I-40 turns NE toward Jackson. The immediate need for such signage may not be apparent until after I-269 is completed in MS and the outer metro traffic patterns adjust to the presence of the new facility. OTOH, I would expect "TO I-22" signage to appear at the I-240 approaches to the E-W section of TN 385 out to Collierville, as that's part of a much shorter pathway to I-22.

In that case, they should do more than add signs on 385. Instead of ending I-22 at I-269 (because the interstate plan was to connect Memphis and Birmingham) they should have I-22 follow I-269 north to 385 right across the state line. hwy 385 should be resigned as I-22 and it would end at the I-240 junction. This would give a direct route from Inner Memphis to Inner Birmingham. I'm not sure if anyone has thought about it on the state and federal level, but they should've.

The interest that TNDOT has had in bringing I-22 into the state is little or none. I-269 is -- or will be -- a perfectly good distribution facility to and from I-22; multiplexing it north on I-269 and then onto WB 385 would involve several miles of backtracking -- and I-22 would still wind up terminating at a 3di (I-240). In addition, the 22/269 interchange is a full cloverleaf -- enhanced with C/D lanes on both freeways, but if an extension plan involving the E-W section of TN 385 were implemented, EB 22 would have to go around a 30mph loop. Unless down the line that interchange were to be upgraded with at least 2 directional flyovers (SB 269-EB 22 and WB 22-WB 269), it would probably be best to leave things as they are, with the connection from I-22 to I-55 effected late next year.

I'm still trying to figure out why there is no sign on I-40 that will show a To I-22 Birmingham/Tupelo shield for the I-269 exit? It would seem like common sense to add this sign to I-40 East/West before exits 24/25.

That may come in time -- but that's one of the inconsistencies when an actual construction project is going on in one state that affects traffic patterns in an adjacent state -- the latter often doesn't get around to posting trailblazer signage until the facility is fully open -- and sometimes not at all. In this instance, the shortest way to get to I-22 from central Memphis is via SB I-55 and EB I-269 rather than from I-40, where the junction with TN 385/I-269 is well east of where I-40 turns NE toward Jackson. The immediate need for such signage may not be apparent until after I-269 is completed in MS and the outer metro traffic patterns adjust to the presence of the new facility. OTOH, I would expect "TO I-22" signage to appear at the I-240 approaches to the E-W section of TN 385 out to Collierville, as that's part of a much shorter pathway to I-22.

In that case, they should do more than add signs on 385. Instead of ending I-22 at I-269 (because the interstate plan was to connect Memphis and Birmingham) they should have I-22 follow I-269 north to 385 right across the state line. hwy 385 should be resigned as I-22 and it would end at the I-240 junction. This would give a direct route from Inner Memphis to Inner Birmingham. I'm not sure if anyone has thought about it on the state and federal level, but they should've.

The interest that TNDOT has had in bringing I-22 into the state is little or none. I-269 is -- or will be -- a perfectly good distribution facility to and from I-22; multiplexing it north on I-269 and then onto WB 385 would involve several miles of backtracking -- and I-22 would still wind up terminating at a 3di (I-240). In addition, the 22/269 interchange is a full cloverleaf -- enhanced with C/D lanes on both freeways, but if an extension plan involving the E-W section of TN 385 were implemented, EB 22 would have to go around a 30mph loop. Unless down the line that interchange were to be upgraded with at least 2 directional flyovers (SB 269-EB 22 and WB 22-WB 269), it would probably be best to leave things as they are, with the connection from I-22 to I-55 effected late next year.

Ideally the best place to terminate I-22 cheaply would have been at I-55. A different design of the I-22/I-269 interchange could have accomplished this, but it is too late now.

Ideally the best place to terminate I-22 cheaply would have been at I-55. A different design of the I-22/I-269 interchange could have accomplished this, but it is too late now.

I'd say it's too late for the time being. It's not a permanent situation. Existing cloverleaf interchanges have been modified before with one or more loops replaced with direct connected flyovers. The I-22/I-269 interchange could be modified in the future with a couple flyover ramps for extending I-22 a few miles West to I-55.

I still think US-78 needs to be improved all the way to I-240 in Memphis, even if I-22 doesn't get routed to that point. Heavy truck traffic through there is ridiculous. Once I-22 is signed to the I-269 loop traffic on US-78 into Memphis will increase. The plan to extend the freeway terminus 3 miles NW to Perkins Road would encourage even more traffic to take the route. There would still be 7 traffic lights along 3.5 miles of "Breezewood" to endure. But it would take less time navigating that rather than going way around on some other loop. So, Memphis may not have any interest in bringing I-22 to I-240, but I think they'll be forced to convert pieces of that street into freeway one intersection or two at a time.

Extending I-22 to the West, along the I-269 loop, bring up another interesting idea about a potential Mississippi River bridge crossing into Arkansas. If cost was no object I'd actually like to see I-22 extended into Arkansas and end at I-40 around Forrest City.

I'm still trying to figure out why there is no sign on I-40 that will show a To I-22 Birmingham/Tupelo shield for the I-269 exit? It would seem like common sense to add this sign to I-40 East/West before exits 24/25.

That may come in time -- but that's one of the inconsistencies when an actual construction project is going on in one state that affects traffic patterns in an adjacent state -- the latter often doesn't get around to posting trailblazer signage until the facility is fully open -- and sometimes not at all. In this instance, the shortest way to get to I-22 from central Memphis is via SB I-55 and EB I-269 rather than from I-40, where the junction with TN 385/I-269 is well east of where I-40 turns NE toward Jackson. The immediate need for such signage may not be apparent until after I-269 is completed in MS and the outer metro traffic patterns adjust to the presence of the new facility. OTOH, I would expect "TO I-22" signage to appear at the I-240 approaches to the E-W section of TN 385 out to Collierville, as that's part of a much shorter pathway to I-22.

In that case, they should do more than add signs on 385. Instead of ending I-22 at I-269 (because the interstate plan was to connect Memphis and Birmingham) they should have I-22 follow I-269 north to 385 right across the state line. hwy 385 should be resigned as I-22 and it would end at the I-240 junction. This would give a direct route from Inner Memphis to Inner Birmingham. I'm not sure if anyone has thought about it on the state and federal level, but they should've.

The interest that TNDOT has had in bringing I-22 into the state is little or none. I-269 is -- or will be -- a perfectly good distribution facility to and from I-22; multiplexing it north on I-269 and then onto WB 385 would involve several miles of backtracking -- and I-22 would still wind up terminating at a 3di (I-240). In addition, the 22/269 interchange is a full cloverleaf -- enhanced with C/D lanes on both freeways, but if an extension plan involving the E-W section of TN 385 were implemented, EB 22 would have to go around a 30mph loop. Unless down the line that interchange were to be upgraded with at least 2 directional flyovers (SB 269-EB 22 and WB 22-WB 269), it would probably be best to leave things as they are, with the connection from I-22 to I-55 effected late next year.

You know, it really doesn't matter where the I-22 signs are. What matters is the traffic, and traffic is going to prove that those flyovers are needed.

Given how polycentric the Memphis metropolitan area is, there probably really isn't that much traffic destined for the Memphis area that needs to traverse the Lamar corridor to get to its ultimate destination - and the trucks by and large are going to the area any freeway upgrade would bypass. I-269 will distribute enough of the traffic around to I-55 and TN 385.

In any event, the plans for Lamar do include an interchange at Winchester, so in effect the freeway section would continue at least to Getwell. If a direct freeway connection to I-240 is strictly necessary in the future, upgrading the Getwell corridor would probably be more feasible anyway.

Given self-driving vehicle technology should be established in the next 20 years I think we can get a lot of extra capacity out of the infrastructure being built now. I think we'll look back in 2040 and wonder what ALDOT was smoking having I-22 be 3 lanes each way between I-65 and Jasper, for example.

These are some pictures I recently took of soon-to-be I-269 from the Shinault Road overpass in Byhalia, MS looking northeast and southwest (toward the I-22 cloverleaf), respectively. It appears that this section will (hopefully!) be opening soon. When I was driving near a future exit in a nearby area, I noticed new posts that will most likely hold the signage for the on-ramps to 269. In the second picture, you can get a glimpse of the comedic genius of some of the locals. Although I havenít heard anything official lately regarding the opening from 305 to 302, hereís hoping that it will end up happening sometime later this month! Photos taken 10/29/17.

If you're going to extend I-22 into Arkansas you might as well have it piggyback I-55 to Turrell and replace I-555 to end at Future I-57 near Hoxie.

In and of itself, that's sort of a useless extension, considering the routing the future I-57 will take. It would have to go considerably farther -- at least into Fictional territory (aka Springfield, MO) to make any sense as an extension.

I mentioned the minor extension of I-22 to I-40 in Arkansas for a couple of reasons, none of which have anything to do with a possible Southern extension of I-57. The existing I-55 crossing of the Mississippi River stinks. It's a puny 4 lane bridge that really needs to be at least double the size. Multiplexing I-22 onto that is just worsening the problem. MS-304 coming off I-69 in Mississippi is aiming right for the big river. A new crossing could be built there. There is minimal development between the river crossing and I-40. There's a good amount of East-West traffic on I-40 headed to/from points like Atlanta. A connection getting that long haul traffic easily around Memphis would lighten the burden on the old I-40 and I-55 bridge crossings in Memphis.

On that topic of I-57, I'm happy enough with I-530 eventually being built to a junction with I-69. It a tough case to make for extending I-57 farther South into Louisiana, presumably to Monroe and then possibly Alexandria. There's lots of possible future Interstate corridors, but I don't think traffic counts are up enough to justify that one at this time. It's going to be difficult enough as it is just finishing I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana. And then we have all the I-14 nonsense going on. You know those efforts will try to suck away money even for a long established corridor like I-49.

I don't think I-22 needs to be extended North of I-40 along I-555, not unless there is a much bigger picture point to it. And if there was a much bigger picture corridor in the works then the I-22 number might not be acceptable. I've always thought it sucked how the Interstate highway system had no I-50. I've got a thing for diagonal Interstates, so I figured a fictional I-50 would be cool running from Jacksonville, FL to at least the Salt Lake City area, if not actually get into California somehow. I-22 would get eaten up in the process.

I mentioned the minor extension of I-22 to I-40 in Arkansas for a couple of reasons, none of which have anything to do with a possible Southern extension of I-57. The existing I-55 crossing of the Mississippi River stinks. It's a puny 4 lane bridge that really needs to be at least double the size. Multiplexing I-22 onto that is just worsening the problem. MS-304 coming off I-69 in Mississippi is aiming right for the big river. A new crossing could be built there. There is minimal development between the river crossing and I-40. There's a good amount of East-West traffic on I-40 headed to/from points like Atlanta. A connection getting that long haul traffic easily around Memphis would lighten the burden on the old I-40 and I-55 bridge crossings in Memphis.

On that topic of I-57, I'm happy enough with I-530 eventually being built to a junction with I-69. It a tough case to make for extending I-57 farther South into Louisiana, presumably to Monroe and then possibly Alexandria. There's lots of possible future Interstate corridors, but I don't think traffic counts are up enough to justify that one at this time. It's going to be difficult enough as it is just finishing I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana. And then we have all the I-14 nonsense going on. You know those efforts will try to suck away money even for a long established corridor like I-49.

I don't think I-22 needs to be extended North of I-40 along I-555, not unless there is a much bigger picture point to it. And if there was a much bigger picture corridor in the works then the I-22 number might not be acceptable. I've always thought it sucked how the Interstate highway system had no I-50. I've got a thing for diagonal Interstates, so I figured a fictional I-50 would be cool running from Jacksonville, FL to at least the Salt Lake City area, if not actually get into California somehow. I-22 would get eaten up in the process.

I agree about I-22 being a nice connection to the Midwest-West for the Southeastern Cities and Florida beaches. Atlanta, Birmingham, Mobile, Montgomery exc have direct access now with I-22. A bypass around Memphis would work for a lot of traffic. Something is really needed quickly for a replacement in the Miss-Arkansas bridge (I-55). It's ancient and would never stand up to even a medium sized earthquake on the New Madrid. TDOT has already been trying to take away the Cloverleaf I-55 Riverside Drive junction with a fly over and Memphis Politics have stopped that for the time being.

These are some pictures I recently took of soon-to-be I-269 from the Shinault Road overpass in Byhalia, MS looking northeast and southwest (toward the I-22 cloverleaf), respectively. It appears that this section will (hopefully!) be opening soon. When I was driving near a future exit in a nearby area, I noticed new posts that will most likely hold the signage for the on-ramps to 269. In the second picture, you can get a glimpse of the comedic genius of some of the locals. Although I havenít heard anything official lately regarding the opening from 305 to 302, hereís hoping that it will end up happening sometime later this month! Photos taken 10/29/17.

THanks for the pics. some guardrails and signs look to be about all that's left on that stretch. So I-269 from I-22 to Arlington will soon be completed.

These are some pictures I recently took of soon-to-be I-269 from the Shinault Road overpass in Byhalia, MS looking northeast and southwest (toward the I-22 cloverleaf), respectively. It appears that this section will (hopefully!) be opening soon. When I was driving near a future exit in a nearby area, I noticed new posts that will most likely hold the signage for the on-ramps to 269. In the second picture, you can get a glimpse of the comedic genius of some of the locals. Although I havenít heard anything official lately regarding the opening from 305 to 302, hereís hoping that it will end up happening sometime later this month! Photos taken 10/29/17.

THanks for the pics. some guardrails and signs look to be about all that's left on that stretch. So I-269 from I-22 to Arlington will soon be completed.

I have a question: Where & why are guardrails needed in the second pic?

These are some pictures I recently took of soon-to-be I-269 from the Shinault Road overpass in Byhalia, MS looking northeast and southwest (toward the I-22 cloverleaf), respectively. It appears that this section will (hopefully!) be opening soon. When I was driving near a future exit in a nearby area, I noticed new posts that will most likely hold the signage for the on-ramps to 269. In the second picture, you can get a glimpse of the comedic genius of some of the locals. Although I havenít heard anything official lately regarding the opening from 305 to 302, hereís hoping that it will end up happening sometime later this month! Photos taken 10/29/17.

THanks for the pics. some guardrails and signs look to be about all that's left on that stretch. So I-269 from I-22 to Arlington will soon be completed.

I have a question: Where & why are guardrails needed in the second pic?

I would think that the rock-lined ditch off to the right of the roadway would be the reason for a guardrail on this curve, although the curvature is not particularly sharp (but someone speeding is likely to shoot off the edge at some point in time). Whether one is installed will likely be determined by MSDOT standard practices.

If Miss. does plan on keeping I-22 ending at I-269 long term, I wonder if they will turn hwy 78 into I-222 from state line to I-22/I269 interchange (this would require some bridge work to get up to interstate standards along the way I believe on hwy 78) or post To I-22 shields heading East on Hwy 78?

If Miss. does plan on keeping I-22 ending at I-269 long term, I wonder if they will turn hwy 78 into I-222 from state line to I-22/I269 interchange (this would require some bridge work to get up to interstate standards along the way I believe on hwy 78) or post To I-22 shields heading East on Hwy 78?

Most likely MSDOT will leave it as US 78 for the time being, but once the I-269 interchange is up & running, might post EB as "TO I-22" like you suggested. It's unlikely that they'll seek a 3di designation for the remaining section between that interchange and the state line; in the event that they did, it'd likely be an odd 3di like 122 or 522 -- but continuing a terminating interstate as a signed 3di "child" hasn't been the practice as of late for any DOT (the only instance being the unsigned I-345 as an extension of I-45 in TX -- although the "triple termination" of 62,264, and 664 in VA might be considered a variation on that theme!).